Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: stbalbach Date: Aug 30, 2009 2:43pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Left side of screen, "View page as.." choose PDF, then some icons will appear at the top of the image, one is a picture of a disk, click to save the PDF.

Stephen

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: mattwj2005 Date: Aug 31, 2009 9:50pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

That only downloads a single page not the whole thing. Also, they don't allow reposting the content on other websites.

Regards,

Matt

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: stbalbach Date: Sep 1, 2009 5:02am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Looks like PDF's can be saved 10 pages at a time, then combined together using Adobe or third party tool, not too much work for a single volume.

It's a Google watermarked scan from the U of MI - a copy is supposed to be on Google Books and on the U of MI site (hathitrust.org) - per the agreement between U of MI and Google - but probably due to a technical problem it only showed up on the U of MI repository (hathitrust.org). This is supported by the fact all the other volumes in the series are on Google Books except this one.

The actual content itself, the plain text, is in the public domain and can't be restricted - for copying the text to Wikisource it's fine, they can't restrict the use of public domain text.

Stephen


This post was modified by stbalbach on 2009-09-01 12:02:45

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: garthus Date: Sep 1, 2009 11:16am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Intellectual rights and the public commons:

Technically the images of public domain texts can be scrubbed by converting PDF to JPG and then back to PDF in Irfanview (running ghostsript plugin). Once all of the internal identification (including water marks) is removed, it becomes a public domain file. Legally they do not have rights to the raw image of the public domain text; only to the additional crap or content which they added to the document. I will not get into the technicalities, but many libraries and Google types are selling many people a 'bill of goods' concerning the reproduction of public domain works. The can only claim rights to what they added to the original content, and an image of a book does not add anything to its content. Only the additional content which is added to the image to claim rights is copy-rightable. These people are intellectual scum who think that they can take from the public commons and restrict access to the publics' own materials. All to make a buck or to satisfy some self-perceived arrogance of purpose.

Gerry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: stbalbach Date: Sep 1, 2009 12:06pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Hi Gerry,

The removal of watermarks would be a great question for the FAQ - do you have more info on the software needed and steps to take? Have you tried it with Google Books and Microsoft scans on IA? Last I remember it was hard to do because they used some sort of multi-layering in creating the PDF's.

Stephen

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: garthus Date: Sep 1, 2009 12:57pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Stephen,

I was very sick for the last 1-2 years, only now start feeling better and still need another operation. However, when I was doing it it was much more difficult; I think now the watermarks may be easier. I will be doing some tutorials on preparing books and pamphlets for digitization, once I get back into it that info will be posted. you are right, it all depends on how the watermark is placed. I found though than nothing is un-removable. Only a question of time. Usually I just borrow the book and rescan it or buy it from ebay and slice it up, (much faster).

Gerry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: stbalbach Date: Sep 1, 2009 8:25pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Good luck to you,I know what it's like facing serious surgery. I'm writing this from a hospital bed, after surgery July 29th, relearning to walk, hopefully, next year or so. Interesting how IA attracts people with health problems; lots of free time, endless free content and desire to contribute to something with lasting value, perhaps.

Stephen

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Time Traveller Date: Sep 6, 2009 2:17am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

visiting the Archive is something you can do from bed.

You might run of reading material around you, but you will never run out reading material if you can access the Archive.

I note your 29th July, Steven, interesting, that is the day my life did another u-turn, that day one of only two doctors able to do it in NZ confirmed my belief that I had Aspergers Syndrome.

for 30 years I got medicated for a misdiagnoses, the meds forced me to stop working in 1989.

Currently I am trying to cope with all the damage the meds caused, 3 nights ago, an ambulance carted me off to hospital, a symptom of vertigo, severe pain, and exhaustion.

Tonight I am freezing, I use a medication to control my medication damaged thyroid which regulates my body temperature. I have lost a lot of weight, I have had lots of weight gaining food which stopped the weight loss, last week I had my official weigh in, I thought i had far overshot my goal, instead, I found I am barely up to normal weight.

the last year, I have been withdrawing from the community, I can barely leave home now.

18 hours from now, I might be being told I lost my doctor, if so, its near impossible to get another one, I am on a special scheme that gives me 100% free health care (small charge for meds. If I lose this docter, I also have to give up my VIP card that gives me free after hours doctors, they are there 24/7 without that VIP card, I pay $70, one third of my weekly income.

Life is hell for me currently, but the Archive will always be here for me, hopefully. Like Gerry, I got heaps to scan and upload, but I can not even stand upright, or even begin sorting boxes of texts, yesterday I carried a chair upstairs, almost callasped on the way up. Gerry is trying to save a life time of collecting onto the Archive, for posterity, I am trying to so too.

both me and Gerry are old, most young people today, never read books, they dont under the value of reading, that might explain why people with health issues are here, the older you get, the more health problems you have.

I find it almost possible to type now when it is cold.

Peter

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: skies Date: Sep 6, 2009 2:49am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

dear time traveller,i am here ,andwe can talk if you want,friendly skies

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: skies Date: Sep 6, 2009 3:25am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

I always answer mail sent to my post if you time traveler ,garthus ,others here want pen pal when unwell,frendly skies

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Time Traveller Date: Sep 6, 2009 5:47am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Skies, ok, where is your post? you mean the forum?

at the moment I am in overload, Gerry is just recovering from a bad spell.

Have to see you later,, its after midnight, tomorrow might be a really bad day for me.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: skies Date: Sep 6, 2009 6:25am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

yes time traveller ,if you post comment to me in GD forum I'll notice and write you back. keep in touch.Hoping you can feel better soon ,garthus too!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: garthus Date: Sep 1, 2009 9:02pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Stephen,

I still have my ful-time job which I barely held on to by working from the hospital on my servers in the office. I want to do as much as possible before I am gone and I think that the Archive is a very worthy project. I also more clearly saw what was important in one's life and even though I never really cared that much about it, material possessions were far down on that list.

Best wishes,

Gerry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: garthus Date: Sep 1, 2009 1:02pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Stephen,

I will check out the faq;s, maybe the links can go there.

Gerry

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Time Traveller Date: Sep 1, 2009 10:32pm
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Does not the copyright belong to the original publisher?

Said copyright does not allow anybody modifying the work,even slightly and putting a new copyright on it.

So would not Google be in breach of the copyright law by modifying the copyrighted book?

If Google modified a book, after it went out of copyright, modifying the text by adding its own logo, legally, only the logo is copyright. (the changes)

So removing the logo, is in effect, keeping yourself safe from Google's copyright.

I would argue that I had a full right to remove that logo, because otherwise I would be in breach of Google's copyright when I distribute the original out-of-copyright text.

The most I could be libel for, was a fraction of the cost to Google to scan the out of copyright text, and a few cents to serve it out to me over the WWW. The text was out of copyright, therefore Google has to treat it as open source, the only charge it can make, is for costs, and not profit. If us people DON'T remove the logo, THEN we are in breach of Google's copyright, but ALL we want, is the original open source which Google modified with a slight proprietary modification, The Logo! If Google tried that with Ubuntu, boy there would be an outcry.

But consider this, Google can only charge for ADDED VALUE, considering that the logo degrades the text, Google should be compensating all the down loaders for degrading the open source text, and NOT trying to charge for added value.

I should have trained as a lawyer, I could tie Google up in court for ever and ever, while it finds answers to such questions. (And I get paid by the hour, not the job)(and thats why lawyers do charge by the hour.)

More importantly, would Google risk legal action, because too much public attention to what its doing, could very well backfire on Google, when the law makers see another Microsoft battle looming, which can make or break want-to-be future politicians now working as lawyers and state and federal attorneys.

How many votes does Google have, in political elections? And Google's actions would make a mockery of current legal actions protecting the latest audio, movies and books, that still are in copyright.

Google is on a sticky wicket already, there is already legal action under way about its attempt to create a monopoly on out of copyright, ownership of old texts.

If you could get the texts off Google Books, but leaving the logo behind, noway will Google have any comeback.

Lateral thinking Peter

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: garthus Date: Sep 2, 2009 4:41am
Forum: texts Subject: Re: Popular Science Monthly Volume 75

Peter,

Great as usual; you shuld post this. Answer:

Google would have no comeback and I would tie them up in court with collateral lawsuits and they know this.

Gerry